AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Antique Gun Collecting => Topic started by: WESTbury on August 28, 2021, 02:08:37 AM
-
Here's something interesting at Poulin's for your viewing pleasure.
https://www.poulinauctions.com/extremely-rare-early-golden-age-john-rupp-signed-kentucky-rifle/
https://www.poulinauctions.com/old-killdeer-famous-golden-age-wolfgang-haga-flintlock-rifle/
-
WOW! 2 beautiful Guns, wish I could hold them just to feel the History bleeding out of them
Thanks for posting
Anthony
-
If John Rupp was born about 1762 (http://www.erickettenburg.com/john-rupp.html) ...
How can this signed Rupp rifle be “undoubtedly” “made in the pre-revolutionary period”--i.e., when Rupp was twelve or thirteen?
And, similarly, how can it be "without doubt one of the very earliest and most authentic 'Kentucky' Rifles in existence"?
-
Shhhh! ;)
-
I think they're quoting the old book published in 1941 as well as from Kindig (who also early-dated a lot, understandable given when his book was published). The copy editor should be fired, however, as the way it's written comes off as a word soup!
-
I think they're quoting the old book published in 1941 as well as from Kindig (who also early-dated a lot, understandable given when his book was published). The copy editor should be fired, however, as the way it's written comes off as a word soup!
Right. Kindig is sixty years old already. We know a lot more than that now, happily. Is it too much to ask for the folks writing auction catalogs to do math that a fourth grader could do?
You know the emoji of a face vomiting money? There should be one of a face vomiting @#$%/!!, which would be an accurate characterization of the writing in auction catalogs--because of the prose and the nonsense that gets recycled.
-
We've all got our own opinions, of course, but I've never seen one of these curvy Allentown-area rifles (fully developed, as is this one) that I believed pre-dated the War. Some of them (as per the Kindig John Rupp rifle that looks a lot like this one) are fairly beefy, especially compared to say the skinny little attributed John Rupp w/ the side opener at Morphy's, but just as the size of the lock and barrel dictate stock shaping for us now, it did for them also. It doesn't necessarily mean that they're "early" or pre-War. Just stout.
-
I always appreciate your tolerance--but, in this case, unless the birth date for John Rupp is wildly off, it is simply not possible for him to have made this rifle in the "pre-revolutionary period" (before 1775).
-
I think you're the first person that has ever used the term "tolerance" as applied to me. ;D
I do agree with you, although I'm kind of 'ignoring' the dating of his birth and simply applying what I believe I know of area rifles to the dating of the piece. In other words, I'm viewing it without the signature.
BTW, this Rupp rifle is absolutely fantastic! Should go for a good penny. I've always found Allentown rifles just like this one to be more appealing (personally) than the "flashier" well-publicized pieces by his brother Herman.
-
I like John's work far better too. This one has the terrific architecture that is so difficult to reproduce. The man was a helluva sculptor.
-
It is a beautiful piece – – especially that “Lehigh head” carved into it! Whoever purchases this will be lucky!
-
Poulin's describers did leave themselves an "out" on the Rupp. The characterization of the rifle as an "Early Golden Age", which if what I've read on this forum is correct, places it after the Rev War.
I'm curious about the Haga rifle. Is this rifle signed or just another rifle attributed to Haga (Hachen)?
-
The “Haga” is not signed. Imagine what a signed Haga would be worth, and the questions it would raise!
-
Poulin's describers did leave themselves an "out" on the Rupp. The characterization of the rifle as an "Early Golden Age", which if what I've read on this forum is correct, places it after the Rev War.
I'm curious about the Haga rifle. Is this rifle signed or just another rifle attributed to Haga (Hachen)?
Maybe an out in the listing title—but not in the listing text: “This is a rare survivor that Joe Kindig in his text on golden age Kentucky rifles states ‘undoubtedly’ ‘made in the pre-revolutionary period.’”
No signed Hagas have ever surfaced.
-
I read a lot of auction catalogs. In the areas I have expertise they are nearly all either inaccurate or, more commonly, vague. When asked (as I frequently am) if a new collector should buy at auction, I always say that if you need the auctioneer's description you aren't qualified to buy at auction. Auction catalogs aren't any more reliable than the legendary used car salesman was...
That said, it's unrealistic to expect that an auction house handling everything from WWII Mausers to wheelocks will have the expertise at hand to describe everything accurately. Most likely, they will have someone who can handle Colt/Wincnester/S&W - and maybe someone who knows CW material but never expect them to know much about flintlocks - even something as well documented and discussed at the American long rifle. When you get into obscure European stiff, the results are often laughable.
-
I always say that if you need the auctioneer's description you aren't qualified to buy at auction.
A point well taken Joe. It sometimes work in reverse though, particularly with regard to Lot 3110 in the RIA auction of part of Moller's collection. The descriptions of Moller's guns seem to have been taken verbatim from his book, but not in all cases I guess.
Kent
-
No signed Hagas have ever surfaced.
Perhaps, no Haga rifles have survived, signed or unsigned.
-
Auction catalogs aren't any more reliable than the legendary used car salesman was...
That said, it's unrealistic to expect that an auction house handling everything from WWII Mausers to wheelocks will have the expertise at hand to describe everything accurately.
In this case, the writer of this description took the time to find information in and quote directly from two books, one from 1941 and another from 1960. A Google Search (which is easier) would have turned up as its top result information about Rupp's birth date in Eric's research. Expertise was not needed to notice the glaring discrepancy between the earlier books and more recent research.
Often, I've been told, experts in the field whose names we would recognize write these descriptions, which are only slightly better than this one.
What surprises me (well, not any more) is that, as Mr. Puleo says, such unreliability is so common and so accepted. I take the point that, if you need the auctioneer's description, you aren't qualified to bid. But that's a separate issue. Why is such laughably inaccurate information so widely accepted? (I would guess the answer is: it doesn't affect the prices and that's what the auction houses, and the buyers and sellers, care about.)
-
Perhaps, no Haga rifles have survived, signed or unsigned.
Well, it seems very likely that no signed Haga rifles have survived. Whether any of the unsigned rifles are Haga's ... pretty much impossible to say.
-
Hi Scott,
You really need to read Daniel Kahneman's book "Thinking Fast and Slow" to understand why such descriptive nonsense is not only tolerated but encouraged, and is inevitable. The book has nothing to do with guns rather the limitations of human reasoning and decision making. It was required reading for my grad students before their comps.
dave
-
You really need to read Daniel Kahneman's book "Thinking Fast and Slow" to understand why such descriptive nonsense is not only tolerated but encouraged, and is inevitable. The book has nothing to do with guns rather the limitations of human reasoning and decision making. It was required reading for my grad students before their comps.
Just ordered & will read! Thanks. Looks very interesting.
-
The people bidding at Poulins will most likely do so in person for these high priced guns. They will go in person or use agents to go inspect and bid (I have done so a couple of times). Everything is online now and nothing is 100% correct - pictures can be wrong, lighting off, descriptions direct from consigners unquestioned, etc. Buying a 5 to 6 figure anything without provenance, inspection in hand by an expert (even if you are the expert), and spending enormous amounts of time going over these guns with very high magnification, multiple wavelengths of light, etc is just gambling. There are a lot of older books with examples that are just wrong - they were wrong then and wrong now - but keep getting regurgitated. Poulins, Morphy, Rock Island, Cowans, etc are good reputable auction houses but - buyer beware as always. These guns are faked or forged more and more - if not outright - they are embellished, repaired, etc and the work impeccable. Its affected the Musket market and certainly the CW market - be careful out there.
-
Brad, I can't help but wonder if you are seeing the collecting of early arms through the lens of Colt, Winchester, and military pieces where I understand that any replacement, restoration or change of finish to any portion of a gun renders it unfit for acquisition. I understand that negativity, but at the same time, I understand that these exacting standards are changing. Consider a Colt Walker; not many around and most have been fooled with in one way or the other.
No matter it is still a six figure gun. They reek of history and suffered from heavy use.
Kentucky rifles suffered much more for a longer period, and so, collectors tend to be more open to putting them back to a reasonable condition. Adding signatures, engraving, patch boxes. inlays where there were none, and so it goes, is forbidden and the experienced collector will detect these negatives.
He may still wish to buy the gun even so. It is an individual decision and few do so with a monetary gain in mind. The rule is that you can do reasonable
restoration, but not doing harm to the piece. I appears that there is still a chasm between the collecting groups, but we hope that your interests and research inspires you to come over to our side.
Dick
-
SOMEONE LET THE TENSION OFF THAT MAINSPRING!!!!! >:( >:(
I will tell you one thing though, if I had that 'Haga' here on a nice December day, I'd absolutely take that sucker deer hunting.
-
"I will tell you one thing though, if I had that 'Haga' here on a nice December day, I'd absolutely take that sucker deer hunting."
Not until you changed that flint, lol..
-
I wouldn't shoot it... but I would take it completely apart. Within safety limits, of course. If a screw was too messed up, I'd leave it be. But taking an original completely apart, and documenting/photographing every piece, is how I learn. This is a big no-no to hard core collectors and museum staff. Except aircraft, cars, and other motive items. Restoration is perfectly acceptable in that area.
A few years ago I had the opportunity to examine an original rifle in a museum. The trigger guard was fastened with 2 wood screws. One was missing, the other was clearly a modern replacement. I would have loved to take the guard off and take the triggers out to examine the inside of the set triggers.
There was an article in the April 1981 issue of Muzzle Blasts about the "Atchison" Hawken. There was a photo of the single set triggers removed from the rifle. This kind of documentation is extremely important. With the prices paid for that rifle in recent auctions, that kind of documentation will never happen again.
Regarding a signed Haga... has anyone ever tried to find a signed Haga from Switzerland? I remember when the signed Albrecht pistol was found in Germany. That was a ground-breaker because only 1 surviving Albrecht rifle was ever found in America. The pistol was from his early working life and the rifle from his later period in Lancaster. No existing signed rifle exists from his time in Christian's Spring, but... like Haga... a whole bunch are attributed.
-
Starting with Scott’s dating of the Rupp and Puleo’s comments we can all agree auction houses rarely get it right, but even more egregious is their attempt to sound “authoritative” by guessing or worst, quoting out of date (sometimes equally inaccurate) literature. Where Poulins says Kindig studied Haga more than anyone, they must not have studied recent scholarship.
Kindig’s, book – researched mostly by Henry Kauffman and Sam Dyke is one of the most important studies of the rifle – but it is not the end-all of information and is hardly up to speed with today’s research. Case in point; Kindig says Haga (if he even made rifles ) started in 1767, but he arrived in Reading in 1750- his well-recorded shop explosion was in 1752. So why did he not make any guns for almost twenty years? Kindig also says Haga’s son may be John Haga in Lancaster county—but Wolfgang and his wife Dorothea only had one Daughter – no sons. His burial headstone says his surname was Hagen, he certainly knew his name. Most of this was known when the book was published in the 1960s, albeit a bit harder to find.
I’m not picking on Joe Kindig, Jr. here, I’m only pointing out the failures of much of the previous work (and that includes some of my writing) and the auction houses' continual reference to such past “celebrity” information to add some form of credibility.
By the way, Dillon with all his love of “Old Killdeer” never mentioned or suggested a gunsmith by the name of Wolfagng Haga existed, but he did hold a rifle in a photo, (not in his book) which he dates the “Killdeer” to 1754, on the back of the photo… that being 36 years before Kindig’s book.
Admittedly, as Joe Puleo pointed out, auction houses handle enormous amounts of gun inventory of all kinds and it is unreasonable for us to expect them to be infallible judges on all types – but, they do have a penchant for using Colt/Winchester mindset to try to describe and justify values of early firearms as though some other authority will back them up. But most of us know, there are only a few solid verifiable facts when it comes to early firearms, those handmade before the manufacturing age of serial numbers, factories, etc. Another habit auction houses have is relying solely on the consignor’s information for the description, assuming the seller knows all since they don’t. Risky?
They should simply give accurate honest condition reports, and provenance, and offer great photos, and let the intelligent buyer decide.
And maybe, read this forum.
Patrick Hornberger
(https://i.ibb.co/sbcFKYR/DSC-0025.jpg) (https://ibb.co/PFJ5cHj)
-
Perhaps the Haga story is cut from a similar cloth as the Meylin Myth.
Shumway may have said it best on page 94 RCA Vol 1 when discussing RCA # 20 and Haga.
"He seems to have been very active as one of Reading"s principal gunsmiths for about 4o years, but no signed piece by his hand is known so attributions are not possible."
That was forty one years ago and no signed rifle by a person named Haga has surfaced in that period. Draw your own conclusions.
-
Sorry if I was communicating things unclear - I know early American Rifles are individual made guns, works of "art" if you will and have lived working lives for hundreds of years - with repairs, restores etc. They are Americana at its finest.
What I am trying to say is NEVER trust anyone on any gun period from pictures and a description. The study of American Long Rifles is somewhat "vague" at best with lots of "attributed to" etcs. due to lack of documentation. in descriptions and books. When these guns were 1500 - 5000 - there was not as much incentive to attempt to deceive. To me - taking a stock that looks "attributed to" an early maker then engraving a name on a barrel, artificially aging it more, adding brass parts to more "fit" the maker is deceit not restoration. Maybe not as much in Long rifles as in muskets there are 10 faked Brown Bess, Charleville, and committee of Safety muskets for every real one - regimental markings, bits and parts, patina added - etc everywhere. Last year I turned down bidding on 3 Long Land Pattern Muskets - 2 were finally pulled from auction - one from Poulins - bad guns too many questions.
Those are stunning guns at Rock Island, Morphy, and now Poulins - so there are plenty to bid on. I personally just would not trust any of them without a serious, serious close inspection. Even the one's that have been in collections - until you look it over top to bottom and make sure it is what it is - maybe it isn't. Its obvious the descriptions are quick and dirty unfortunately. Nothing hurts quite as bad as when you go to sell that 65K LongRifle and questions start coming up on "patch box not right, Moller was wrong back then, etc".
Like you said - if you need the Descriptions "Probably better not to bid" - though they can be helpful for bad repairs etc where pictures don't show good results.
I will be inspecting and bidding on a few at a couple of these auctions so I hope my perseverance and approach work! LOL! So far no burns in collecting - just a few earl scrapes.
****I do have a LOT to learn about the makers, styles, regions, historic guns etc - I am green no doubt!
-
I’m not picking on Joe Kindig, Jr. here, I’m only pointing out the failures of much of the previous work (and that includes some of my writing) and the auction houses' continual reference to such past “celebrity” information to add some form of credibility.
.....
They should simply give accurate honest condition reports, and provenance, and offer great photos, and let the intelligent buyer decide.
And maybe, read this forum.
I agree with everything Patrick wrote wholeheartedly.
It's a good thing that we know more now than we did 60 years ago! Other fields would treat this as a given. Correcting information, or uncovering new information that places old stories in a new light, involves no disrespect to earlier authors.